Hello, everybody. The reason why I wanted to ask this because I'm not sure what is true and what is a myth. So, I'll have to start ask questions: 1. Is this really true that there is no such thing as 100% empty space? When I say 100% empty I meant to say totally empty space where there is nothing, not even energy? Has this been experimentally proven/disproven? Than I read that the entire universe even the emptiest part of the universe are full of fields??? Do you mean like energy fields or force fields (what exactly is force field?)? 2. I remember that I watched on Discovery science that created/made an experiment where scientists experimented with completely empty space-100% vacuum with no particles, fields or anything, just pure nothingness, and from the vacuum actually there created the smallest particles and fields(???) First of all I watched this 1.5 years ago so I cannot tell if this is true my memory has weakened a lot since then, but I rely on you since you already know if this is true or not, please correct me if I'm wrong. 3. I recently heard that the universe is accelerating/expanding faster than light, but it's not the galaxies that travel Faster than light, it is the space itself between galaxies that accelerates/expands faster than light-is this true or false? 4. So what does it mean for space, does it mean that space is like chewing gum, and what exactly in space gives space so much energy to expand faster than light, quantum fluctuations of space (virtual particles/anti-particles ?), dark energy or both, or something else? Thank you for your time and patience. I hope you had nice holidays. Cheers.
There can't be nothing. Even in a controlled setting to be considered separate from the rest of the universe I would have placed an observation, right? A vacuum, that is a vacuum, so something as well. Nothing is a myth. Can't even say it. "Nothing." Look I did a vocabulary.
1 It is true that there is no 100% empty space as you describe it, there is something called the groundstate also known as zero point energy For example this means that HElium will not freeze even at absolute pressure (unless you also pressurise it). It is also true that the ground state is not uniform. the vacuum energy is poorly understood and 1m³ could contain 1x10^-9 joules or 1x10^113 joules to put this into context the entire observable universe is in the order of 4x10^69 joules 2 virtual particles?
Thus far all viable models of particle physics predict such things and are consistent with experiments in regards to the corrections to calculations such phenomena require. It is a somewhat abstract concept. Energy isn't a field in and of itself, it is a property fields have, in the same way temperature is not a thing in and of itself but rather a measure of the properties of something else. You can 'pull' particles out of the vacuum using oscillating mirrors. You hold two mirrors very close together and shake them in a manner where the acceleration is non-constant. It turns out they cause photons, particles of light, to be created and passed between them via interaction with the background vacuum. You have to put in more energy than you get out but the method is sound. As the current models have it, yes. The universe's space-time is expanding and carrying with it galaxies. For galaxies too far away to really attract one another by gravity in any meaningful way the expansion causes galaxies to move away from one another. I fear that a full answer to those will require several centuries, trillions of dollars in research, billions of Man-years of research and a hell of a lot of effort to full answer. Much of the current models are defined with those properties in mind, making the reason why certain things are as they are unclear. For example, according to the big bang model the universe expands ever faster because the cosmological constant is positive. But why is it positive? Don't know but we can work out its value using the model and experimental data and then predict things about it's properties even without knowing why things are as they are.
Well, I was fully aware of that, but I wanted confirmation from the side of physicists, just in case. what I meant that even vacuum that is completely empty has energy, even if you don't look/observe at it.
Well, what I watched is that they basically had a chamber in which scientists have basically fully extracted just about everything from it, so it was a pure vacuum with nothing inside (including fields), but the vacuum itself still generated particles, just unbelievable. 100% vacuum has energy. But I thought the have actually detected this and and o course measured it, so it's not just some hypothesis, but the real fact? I fear that a full answer to those will require several centuries, trillions of dollars in research, billions of Man-years of research and a hell of a lot of effort to full answer. Much of the current models are defined with those properties in mind, making the reason why certain things are as they are unclear. For example, according to the big bang model the universe expands ever faster because the cosmological constant is positive. But why is it positive? Don't know but we can work out its value using the model and experimental data and then predict things about it's properties even without knowing why things are as they are.[/QUOTE] Well, this civilization wouldn't hold that long, I gave to us no more than 300 years (but that's a completely different topic), this is why it so important to the most detailed research of the universe we can in this period of time, but it also questions how much more can we discover, detect and measure... Thanks for your time and patience.
